Skip to main content
2 – Editor note’s
Por Márcio Merkl e Marcelo Mazzola
3 – The Voice of Others: The Rights of Voice Actors in Brazil
Por Luiz Guilherme Valente
Despite its relevance to the entertainment industry, the rights of voice actors are not properly regulated in Brazil. This paper
analyses which legal regimes apply to dubbing, the problems caused by the lack of specific legal treatment and the absence of
uniformity in court decisions.
Keywords: voice acting – copyright – author’s rights – related rights – voice personality right
24 – Copyright and Copyleft Licenses for Software An analysis from a legal-economic perspective regarding copyright and copyleft licensing modalities, according to the Brazilian legal system
Por Edson Mota Valença Filho
The article has as object the economic analysis of software’s Copyright Law under the austrian’s economics perspective. In this sense, the general objective of this papper is to analysis the convenience of software’s copyright and copyleft licenses under the law and economic’s perspective.
Keywords: copyright – software contract – copyleft – law and economics – software law
39 – Trademark Registration Nullity Action: Decadent Term and Possibility of Suspension
Por Caroline Somesom Tauk e Celso Araújo Santos
The Brazilian IP Law sets a time period to file the nullity action against trademark registration (article 174). The time period may be suspended under the law, as in the case of administrative nullity proceedings, based on Decree #20,910 of 1932. It is suggested the resolution by a binding precedent issued by the Brazilian Superior Court or by the Federal Court of Appeal.
Keywords: trademark – trademark nullity action – expiration of the time period – administrative proceeding
51 – Unconstitutionality of Paragraph 1 of Article 36 of the LPI for Offense to the Principle of Proportionality
Por Bernardo Marinho Fontes Alexandre
Article 36, 1st paragraph, of the IP Law, when establishing the definitively lapse of a patent application upon failure to reply an office action, violates the constitutional principle of proportionality. It is unreasonable to deny coverage for a patentable invention in the absence of a reply to an office action (issued when the patent application has correctable irregularity) where as this denial does not happen when an unfavorable opinion (issued when the invention is not patentable) is not responded.
Keywords: unconstitutionality – proportionality – office action – lapse, patent pareceres de órgãos públicos

59 – Opinion n. 00008/2019 / CGPI / PFE-INPI / PGF / AGU

71 – Approval Order n. 00056/2019 / PROCGAB / PFE-INPI / PGF / AGU
72 – Schedule